User talk:Sulfur/Archive2008
This user believes in keeping talk page conversations in one place. If you leave a comment here, expect a reply on this page. Blah! :For older discussions, see the 2006 archives or the 2007 archives. USS Antares image It's also up on Trekmovie.com, and I know we ARE using those images.Capt Christopher Donovan 09:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC) :It may be up on trekmovie.com, but if so, that means that either they have gotten written permission from startrek.com to use it, or that they're not following the rules either. :Anyhow, we've made it a past practice with these such images for the remastered episodes to not use them until the episode has aired, and until someone can actually get a proper screen capture. Legally speaking, it's just a bit safer for all involved really. -- Sulfur 11:59, 5 July 2007 (UTC) Fair enough. Perhaps you could clarify something for me though: can Startrek.com exempt itself from "fair use" simply by boilerplate denying ALL permission to reproduce? I thought that "fair use" was a universal rule that could not be overrriden.Capt Christopher Donovan 21:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC) ::Besides any possible legal issues or non-issues, there's also the simple fact that those images are not actual screenshots (which we prefer). -- Cid Highwind 21:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC) "Special" Single quotes? What do you mean? I must not put in any lines of dialogue?– Orr6000 18:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC) :No, I mean, simply, only use ' and ". Don't use the weird characters. -- Sulfur 18:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC) B-4 I noticed you re-edited a change I made to B-4. Here's my reasoning. Although B-4 showed up in a later movie, after Lore and Data of the tv series, he was actually thought to be an earlier, more primitive, prototype, lost and later rediscovered. If true, this would make Lore and Data both younger, not older, brothers. - unsigned by :Hrm... well, the changes that I reverted were to remove the name "Soong" from them, especially since none of Data, Lore, or B-4 were ever referred to with that last name. Indeed, Data's full name according to Starfleet is... "Data". -- Sulfur 13:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC) ::I think the anon got you confused for me, Sulfur. This user made this edit here, which I reverted since B-4 was created before both Data and Lore, regardless of when he was discovered. --From Andoria with Love 16:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC) get the pronunciation right In regards to your crack about getting the pronunciation right, I can only think of one thing to say in that regard and that is this. *raspberry* LOL :-) – leandar 14:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC) Your advice on images OK. I will make sure to add categories to images. Can you please provide me with a link to a list of categories, so I can make sure I apply all appropriate categories. I promise to be more careful in the future. -Nmajmani 13:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani :Go visit Category:Memory Alpha images, and you'll see a long list of relevant categories at the top. If you can't find one of those to fit your upload into, default back to Category:Memory Alpha images. :) -- Sulfur 13:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC) ::OK Thanks. Image Tags? What's that about?– Orr6000 18:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC) :It's a new "useful" mediawiki extension. We're not making much use of it though, which isn't a bad thing. I'd just simply suggest ignoring them for the time being. -- Sulfur 18:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Not an edit war. The problem with Roxann Dawson's page is that a new user keeps replacing the current picture with others that do not have proper citations and thus may constitute possible copyright infringements. If there is one thing I have learned here is the importance of that, as you will recall.– Orr6000 19:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC) :Read what you wrote.. "keeps replacing the current picture with others". That constitutes an edit war. 'Nuff said. -- Sulfur 19:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC) ::Then leave the lock. – Orr6000 19:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC) ::You may also want to advise the contributor, User:TorresOmega593, on image policy...O Imperious One. :)– Orr6000 19:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Yugoslavia?? there was mason of Serbo-Croatians in episode Shuttlepod One, thus implying that Yugoslavia maybe exists in some form in this time can i make article about Serbia?? Help with mergin please, i can't make the template you told me to use for starting a mergin discussion work. can you please make it for me?--Örlogskapten 22:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC) :Simply add the template to the top of the page, such as , and then let things happen. It's best to read the documentation on templates when you can't figure out how to use them right off. -- Sulfur 23:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC) tnx--Örlogskapten 23:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks Hey, thanks for reverting 67.161.218.175's 'interesting' edits on one of my user pages. Picard(o) 09:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Re: Realworld stuff Can you make sure to throw the template on articles about novels and authors when you create 'em? Much appreciated. :) -- Sulfur 16:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC) :Will do. -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 16:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Image categorizing I see you had to go and categorize a bunch of images I uploaded today. It's been a while since I editted to MA, and so I didn't know that one has to categorize images these days ;-) I'll remember to do that whenever I upload new pics. I'm sorry I caused this inconvenience for you. Ottens 17:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Dark Frontier...OUCH!!! *laughs* You mean I spent two days doing all that work for nothing?! OUCH!!!! *Snickers and sighs heavily* Well... thanks for telling me. Feel free to revert the Dark Frontier article to what it was before. I do not think you will want to merge the two together...that would be way too long. OUCH! DAMMIT, MAN! *laughs*– Orr6000 21:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Maintenance Greetings, O Imperious One. :) If you look on the [[:Category:Memory Alpha images by episode (VOY: Night)|image page for the Voyager Episode Night]], you will see two images: Image:Controller Emck.jpg and Image:Emck.jpg. They are the same, except the second one is a close-up. Do what you think is appropriate.– Obsidian One 15:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC) :The place to bring them up is generally on the Images for Deletion page. Just as an aside. -- Sulfur 16:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Hope You Don't Mind... I got tired of the generic name orr6000 when everybody else here has such interesting names. So I created a new account under Obsidian One and have begun using that. I also chose the nickname The Head of The Obsidian Order. 'The Obsidian Order'... I just like the sound of it. :) And to prevent some schmuck from using The Head of The Obsidian Order as their login name, I created an account on it with my password. There is only one head...me! :)– The Head of the Obsidian Order 18:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Clarification I saw your comment about formatting episode titles but I would just like to know specifically what to do. I didn't understand what was different about the correct way and what I had done. Thanks 31dot 23:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC) :Episode titles get "" around them. In fact, the best way to refer to an episode is to use the episode link template, such as , which will produce . When referring to a series, put the series abbreviation at the start, such as , which gives . Fun, huh? -- Sulfur 00:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC) ::I think I get it now, thanks again 31dot 01:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Please weigh in. Could you please check out the image deletion page and weigh in on discussion number 8? I am really confused about the whole 'fair use' thing. The Cobra's assertion goes against what I understand the MA position on copyrighted material to be. – The Head of the Obsidian Order 02:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC) A Change of Heart I saw that the summary of Survival Instinct begins with a short precis, so I decided to add that in to other summaries. But, as with Nothing Human, I realized that there is no point to that for many episode summaries, as the little into on the top does that already. But you beat me to deleting if from Nothing Human...:)– The Head of the Obsidian Order 00:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Background infos Background infos come from the Italian Trek database HyperTrek (http://www.hypertrek.info) --Afullo 01:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC) :That's nice and all... but what's the source for the information there? -- Sulfur 01:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC) There is a staff mailing list, some dozens of people are registered in there and they (or better we :P) work together to improve the site. We add infos only based upon direct viewing of the episodes or canon sources, and anyway the last word about whether putting on a certain info or not is of the owner of the site. Mailing list home page if you want to know more: http://mail.hypertrek.info/mailman/listinfo/staff --Afullo 02:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC) :That's all good for first appearances of things, etc. However, that does not work for working titles of episodes, information from writers, etc. Those things need some sort of citation. A source. Another webpage doesn't do the trick, unless it is an interview transcription or something similar. HyperTrek isn't those. -- Sulfur 02:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Equinox I was going to incorporate the ID number into the article then remove the duplicated info. I was back in it when I realized that it had been reverted already. --StarFire209 13:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Boot me, please! I must still be logged into IRC on my computer at home. I need someone to boot me so I can log in again. Bah. -- Renegade54 15:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC) :done. -- Sulfur 15:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC) contributions I didn't come here to make work for you or get into edit wars or verbal fisticuffs though that's what it seems like in the 12 days since my first contribution. I have a different take on Trek than most. I never drank the Kool-Aid. I try to see Trek for what it is, not just what people want it to be. While I do like a good argument, I want it to be rational. I see a lot of unreasonable speculation and a lot of speculation passing for canon here and believe challenging those are valid exercises in MA. (I think the "AD" issue is an example of speculation passing as canon that deserves to be addressed but that's not even the issue anymore.) You reverted my changes almost before I finished them. (In the case of Equinox, it WAS before I finished.) If I didn't realize you were changing the centuries pages right behind me, I could have changed (and you reverted) a dozen more pages. You couldn't have waited a couple of days? or even a couple of hours? Perhaps with some discussion we could have reached a solution that wouldn't seem so unilateral or draconian. I would have undone or revised my contributions if necessary or perhaps you might see there's some validity to my changes. Maybe others could see the changes and have an opinion. This is supposed to be a collaborative effort. How can I contribute if you're going to decide beforehand what I'm allowed to do? Why should I contribute only to see my efforts unceremoniously discarded? It was fun when I started but it isn't right now. I think I have a lot to offer MA, but not if I have to wonder if everything I do is going to be undone. So please give me space. Let me contribute even if that means I make a mistake or tread on someone's toes. If I want to challenge what's accepted as "canon", let me make my arguments. Let other contributers have their say on what I write. Let me try to change your mind. Let others try to change mine. – StarFire209 19:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC) :Nobody even offered the Kool-Aid to me. :( -- Renegade54 21:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC) ::To address things in an utterly random order: ::In the case of finishing changes and reverting them, when an edit is saved, it is assumed that the editor is finished making changes to the page unless he or she has marked it with an tag (which should, of course, be removed when complete). There is a "show preview" button that should be used when working on an edit so that you don't have to edit and save the same page 10+ times (such as your recent endeavour, "Extinction"). In the case of the centuries and your additions and talk page comments, you need only add a talk page comment in one place. On the other talk pages, you can direct the conversation there, elsewise, the conversation begins to wander across a wide variety of talk pages and it eventually gets lost or misplaced, unless someone takes the time to amalgamate it all. Which is, unnecessary work. :::As I mention on my user page, there was a reason I saved in chunks. I didn't know about the tag. I see the point in making the same comment multiple times. Starfire ::Yes, there is a lot of speculation here. It's something that we're trying to cut down on, and it's something that there's always going to be a lot of, unfortunately. In terms of the AD/CE stuff, one of them was mentioned on-screen, which is what we go by. Nothing else was mentioned, and at one point, we actually had (for every date on those pages) both shown, until someone pointed out that the "AD" was actually mentioned, and "CE" never was. Yes, there were still some articles out there that used a mixed bag of the two, but that's mostly because they were missed in the initial cleanup a year (or so) ago. :::Was "AD" mentioned for every date? or only once? Did people actually say "17th century '''AD'" or "21st century AD"? In what context was the term "mentioned"? Was the only use of "AD" was inside a holonovel, where characters also mention "gats" and "shooters"? I didn't see any citations for the global use of "AD". If you really want to reduce speculation in MA, say ing "it was mentioned, now it's canon" doesn't really help. Starfire ::In terms of challenging canon, go right ahead. But take note as to what is considered canon, and come up with evidence to back up your challenges. Screen shots, quotes, and references are required to bring up a valid challenge. :::In the case of "AD", I'm not actually challenging canon. I'm challenging speculation masquerading as canon. Shouldn't the person making the assertion be required to back it up? ::Finally, you may (or may not) have come across the "strong suggestions" to avoid swearing on talk pages where possible. Your attempted workarounds with phrases like "Suppositional Highly Imaginative Theorization" just doesn't cut it. It's a pathetic attempt to avoid the way things work around here. Simply use other words that mean the same kind of thing. "Crap" is a good replacement. Not t'other way around. :::Normally, I have much better ways of expressing my incredulity or irritation. But the inanity of the situation got the better of me. (Those are my "I" words for today :} } I'm sorry you didn't appreciate the joke. I thought it was amusing, a take-off on the "special high intensity training" joke that's been around for decades. Starfire ::Have fun playing with the other kids in the sandbox. Remember that it's not all about you. There's a community here that's been around for a hell of a lot longer than you have been part of it. Be a part of it. Don't accuse (ie Cobra with the vandalism stuff), don't whine and complain (see the warning on every edit box "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here."), play nicely with the other contributors. Lots of other people have managed it. -- Sulfur 11:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC) :::I've already offered an apology to Cobra for impugning his honor. That warning may be valid, but that doesn't mean people '''shouldn't' offer explanations when they revert something. It may not always work but it's worth the effort. Failing to explain may lead to an edit war or hard feelings or discouragement. Newcomers shouldn't be made to feel like they're crashing a party for the "entrenched."'' – 68.83.22.132 17:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC) (Starfire209 - session timed out) ::::I just wanted to say I support that a comment should be added for EVERY revertion. not much has to be said. like vandalisation or something like that.-- Örlogskapten... My channel... 18:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Nightingale Sorry you had to step in there. I was actually planning to make the redirect a disambiguation myself, but since I thought it better to fix the links first, and that took some time, you beat me to it. Anyway thanks for the help, I saw you even beat me to fixing some links, you work way faster than I can :). greets, Capricorn 03:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC) :I'm just keen and geeky. :) As an aside, it's best to just point to that page as a disambig rather than listing all of the various pages on each of the pages. -- Sulfur 03:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC) ::I changed that, thanks for the hint. Capricorn 04:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the tip! Hey, thanks for the picture formatting tip. I was somehow under the mistaken impression that, since we were entirely using non-free images, the whole of MA was de facto under a license that didn't need to be made explicit. And I would never have noticed the picture categories had you not mentioned them! I think I've corrected everything I've uploaded to this point. CzechOut ☎ | 03:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :Thanks for your continuing assistance. Please feel free to shoot me a line anytime you notice something I could be doing better. CzechOut ☎ | 03:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)